Judge Patrick Connolly

Judge Patrick Connolly serves in the criminal division of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, assigned to the Van Nuys courthouse. His pre-bench career was as a prosecutor, and at least one of his prosecuted cases — a murder conviction involving a cop killer — later returned to court for resentencing proceedings. In 2023, Judge Connolly took the notable step of attempting to disqualify a fellow Los Angeles County Superior Court judge from presiding over that resentencing, citing concerns about the colleague's potential orientation toward leniency. The effort drew significant media coverage from the Los Angeles Times, ABA Journal, and Fox News. The recusal attempt was ultimately unsuccessful, and the resentencing bid was subsequently denied. The 2023 recusal episode is the most concrete data point available about Judge Connolly's judicial orientation. His active intervention to prevent a colleague he viewed as potentially lenient from presiding over a high-profile resentencing case reflects a law-and-order posture. His background as a prosecutor who handled serious violent felonies, including murder cases, further contextualizes his approach to criminal proceedings. A Commission on Judicial Performance record exists for a judge associated with this name, indicating at least one formal disciplinary proceeding. No ruling analyses, attorney observations, or ingested content are available to supplement the profile data. Attorneys should treat this intelligence report as a starting-point profile rather than a comprehensive behavioral analysis, and should conduct independent research before appearing before Judge Connolly.

Given Judge Connolly's prosecutorial background and the documented 2023 recusal episode, defense attorneys in particular should be prepared for a judge who takes public safety and victim-centered arguments seriously in criminal proceedings. Arguments framed around law enforcement interests, the severity of criminal conduct, and the integrity of original verdicts are grounded in the factual record of his conduct. Prosecutors appearing before him should recognize that he has demonstrated willingness to take procedural action to protect outcomes he views as just, which suggests attentiveness to procedural propriety and case integrity. For any party — prosecution or defense — appearing in resentencing, sentence modification, or post-conviction proceedings, the 2023 episode is directly relevant. Judge Connolly's documented effort to remove a colleague from a resentencing case signals that he views such proceedings with heightened scrutiny. Defense counsel seeking leniency in post-conviction matters should prepare exceptionally thorough records and be ready to address public safety considerations head-on rather than minimizing them. The existence of a Commission on Judicial Performance record warrants attention. Attorneys should research the publicly available CJP record to understand the nature of any disciplinary proceeding before appearing before Judge Connolly. That record may contain information relevant to courtroom conduct expectations or procedural sensitivities.

• critical

  Research the CJP Record

  The Commission on Judicial Performance maintains public records of disciplinary proceedings. Attorneys should retrieve and review any publicly available CJP record associated with Judge Connolly before appearing, as it may contain information about conduct or procedural issues directly relevant to courtroom preparation.

• critical

  Review 2023 Media Coverage of Recusal Episode

  The Los Angeles Times, ABA Journal, and Fox News all covered Judge Connolly's 2023 attempt to disqualify a colleague from a resentencing case. Reviewing this coverage will provide context about his stated reasoning and public posture on resentencing and judicial conduct.

• important

  Prepare Robust Public Safety Record in Post-Conviction Matters

  For any resentencing, sentence modification, or post-conviction proceeding, defense counsel should prepare a thorough record addressing public safety considerations, given the documented pattern of Judge Connolly's opposition to leniency in such proceedings.

• important

  Assess Recusal or Disqualification Issues Early

  Given that Judge Connolly himself sought to recuse a colleague based on perceived bias, he is demonstrably familiar with recusal procedures. Any party with a legitimate basis to seek disqualification should assess that issue at the earliest stage of proceedings.

• important

  Gather Independent Attorney Observations

  No attorney observations are available in this dataset. Attorneys should seek firsthand accounts from colleagues who have appeared before Judge Connolly in the Van Nuys criminal division to supplement this profile before a significant hearing.

• ›Treat procedural rules as non-negotiable: Judge Connolly's documented conduct reflects a judge who takes procedural integrity seriously and is willing to act formally when he believes procedure is being circumvented.
• ›Do not minimize the severity of criminal conduct or victim impact in argument: the documented record reflects a judge with a law-and-order orientation who prosecuted serious violent felonies before taking the bench.
• ›Be prepared to address public safety arguments directly and substantively, particularly in any post-conviction or sentencing proceeding, rather than relying on general equitable appeals.
• ›Avoid any suggestion that the court should defer to leniency as a default: the 2023 recusal episode documents active resistance to perceived leniency in a high-profile criminal matter.